Online Editor Jackson Robb discusses the verdict of the Brittany Higgins V Bruce Lehrmann Trial and the ways in which it has concerned Australian political and journalistic values.
Content Warning: Rape and Sexual Assault
On April 15, a case that has polarised the Australian media for the last several years finally reached its conclusion, when Justice Michael Lee declared that on the “balance of probabilities”, Brittany Higgins was raped by former political staffer Bruce Lehrmann in Parliament House in 2019 [1]. The case was unique as it not only aimed to prove that Higgins’s account of the events in Parliament House were true but also that her interview on Network 10’s The Project in 2021 was not an act of defamation against Lehrman [2]. With politicians, journalists and producers providing evidence in the case, this article will highlight how a fateful night in Parliament house and a TV interview resulted in one of Australia’s most important and historic trials.
Originally, prosecutors brought the case of Lehrmann’s alleged assault to the ACT court in 2022 but it was declared a mistrial. The mistrial was concluded on the grounds of juror misconduct as a jury member brought outside research papers on sexual assault into the case, which ACT chief justice, Lucy McCallum, repeatedly told members not to do [3].
The case was meant to go to a retrial in February of 2024 but was abandoned in December of 2022 out of concerns for the mental health of Higgins. The verdict came after ACT director of public prosecutions, Shane Drumgold, sought advice from medical experts that suggested the continuation of the trial would pose an “unacceptable risk” for Higgins [4].
Higgins received a settlement of about 2.4 million dollars for legal fees, medical expenses and the compensation for the “hurt, distress and humiliation” she faced during the trial [5].
However, what was thought to have been a dismissed case was reopened in February of 2023 when Lehrmann filed a defamation case against Network 10 and the reporter who conducted the original interview with Higgins on The Project, Lisa Wilkinson, on the grounds that whilst the interview did not name him as the perpetrator, he was able to be identified from the information provided [6].
In order to deem whether Network 10 and Wilkson has committed defamation, the courts needed to conclude whether Lehrmann had indeed raped Higgins in order for it to be considered defamation.
The final conclusion saw Lehrmann lose the case with Justice Lee stating that Lehrmann “did not care one way or the other whether Ms Higgins understood or agreed to what was going on” and that he was “hellbent on having sex with a woman he found attractive” that night [7].
Lee commented on the original trial, stating “Having escaped the lion’s den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat” [8]
The result was found on the balance of probabilities, with Lee taking into consideration how intoxicated both parties had been and the events that led to Lehrmann and Higgins arriving at Parliament House in the early hours of the morning.
Lee was critical of both Lehrmann and Higgins in his review. He said that to call Lehrmann a “poor witness would be an understatement” and that he had shown no prior signs of being a workaholic that would have justified him going back to Parliament House after a night of drinking [9]. Higgins was described as a "complex and unsatisfactory witness" and had at points "selectively curated material on her phone prior to giving it to the AFP" but ultimately, her conduct was deemed consistent with that of a sexual assault survivor [10].
Lee also concluded that Wilkinson was a “polished and articulate” journalist who was let down by the legal advice offered to her by Network 10 [11]. Lee also referenced Wilkson’s infamous Logies speech where she showed support for Higgins but ended up disrupting the original trial, claiming she should have known delivering the speech was "fraught with danger".
The case spanned several years and brought into question some of the core principles of Australian journalism. With Network 10 heavily involved in the case, Channel 7 was also seen to become involved with Spotlight producer Taylor Auerbach bringing into evidence that Channel 7 staff paid for massages, drugs, accommodation, and sex workers for Lehrmann in order to secure an interview with him [12].
Having a case such as this that involves two professions considered deeply untrustworthy by the general public, both politicians and journalists, resulted in a significant weight being placed on the verdict of the trial. Ultimately, Higgins’s plight to tell her side of the story and the dedication from Wilkinson to portray an honest depiction of Higgins lead to their historic victory. Wilkinson stated outside the court after the verdict “I sincerely hope that this judgment gives strength to women around the country”.
ENDNOTES
[1] - Meade, A., & Lyons, K. (2024, April 15). Bruce Lehrmann “hellbent on having sex” with Brittany Higgins and raped her in Parliament House, defamation judge finds. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/apr/15/bruce-lehrmann-defamation-trial-judge-verdict-rape-brittany-higgins-parliament-house-ntwnfb
[2] Ibid.
[3] - Knaus, C. (2022, December 1). Bruce Lehrmann retrial won’t proceed after prosecutors drop charges for alleged rape of Brittany Higgins. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/dec/02/bruce-lehrmann-retrial-wont-proceed-after-prosecutors-drop-charges-for-alleged-of-brittany-higgins
[4] Ibid.
[5] - Lyons, K. (2024, April 19). Brittany Higgins received $2.4m in compensation. Why are some now saying she should pay it back? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/apr/20/brittany-higgins-compensation-bruce-lehrmann-case-anti-corruption-commission-investigation-ntwnfb#:~:text=The%20documents%20show%20that%20Higgins
[6] - Dumas, D. (2024, April 15). Bruce Lehrmann and Brittany Higgins saga: the night that spawned more than a dozen legal cases. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/apr/14/bruce-lehrmann-and-brittany-higgins-saga-the-night-that-spawned-more-than-a-dozen-legal-cases-ntwnfb
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] – Toomey, J. (2024, April 15). Judge rules that Bruce Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins “without caring whether she consented.” ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-15/bruce-lehrmann-defamation-trial-judgment/103706656
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] - Meade, A. (2024, April 3). Bruce Lehrmann defamation case: How little-known television producer Taylor Auerbach became the star witness. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/apr/03/bruce-lehrmann-defamation-case-how-little-known-television-producer-taylor-auerbach-became-the-star-witness
Comments